Authors: Cordelia Fine, Professor, History & Philosophy of Science program, School of Historical & Philosophical Studies, The University of Melbourne; Kate Lynch, Lecturer in Philosophy of Science, University of Sydney, and Morgan Anna Weaving, Research Affiliate, Stanford Graduate School of Business, Stanford University What causes workplace sexual harassment? How can we continue to better understand […]
Author: Henry Taylor, Associate Professor, Department of Philosophy, University of Birmingham What can you see right now? This might seem like a silly question, but what enters your consciousness is not the whole story when it comes to vision. A great deal of visual processing in the brain goes on well below our conscious awareness […]
One century ago, when philosophers talked about technology, they’re not usually discussing the latest app or whether artificial intelligence will take our jobs. They were asking bigger questions: What does technology do to us as human beings? How does it change the way we see the world? And perhaps most importantly, is it helping us […]
We finish this series with the most influential author of our trio (together with Bacon and Descartes) in shaping the scientific method: the Italian Galileo Galilei, who was also, not coincidentally, the most brilliant and prolific scientist of the three. He shared with Descartes the ambition of reducing the phenomena to be investigated to a […]
In my last entry we had a glimpse on the ideas of one of the three main ‘fathers’ of ‘the’ scientific method, Francis Bacon. As I told then, inverted commas are justified because there is nothing like ‘the’ scientific method, only a family of different, and at times mutually inconsistent, sets of procedures, rules and […]
Although science was not born in the seventeenth century (since the need for reliable information about the environment is intrinsic to any human society, and disciplines such as mathematics, astronomy, or biology had already flourished splendidly in Classical Antiquity), we cannot deny that around the year 1600 the history of humanity crossed a decisive threshold […]
As we saw in our last entry, we must grant Gabriel that he does not conceive of the spirit and spiritual as an “immortal soul” or any similar ghostlike entity, but rather as something grounded in human thought—more specifically, in what relates to norms, values, laws, institutions, and rules of various kinds (I Am Not […]
In the our last entry, we saw the weakness of Gabriel’s ‘inism’ (the belief that to exist has to be identical to ‘exist in something’) as the most important logical fault of his ontology. We also saw that his idea that ‘the world’ (in the sense of a super-entity comprising the totality of real beings) […]
The main ontological thesis of the German philosopher Markus Gabriel could be summed up in the phrase: “the Whole does not exist, but everything exists.” If we replace “the Whole” with a more familiar word (“the world”), the first part of the thesis amounts to the striking claim that “the world does not exist”—a phrase […]
We saw in our past entry how the moral philosophy theory known as longtermism is rooted in the historical trend towards ‘the expansion of the circle of empathy’, in order to include all future human beings (or ‘persons’, we might say, including non-human, or post-human persons), and also commented on some flaws of the theory […]